lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20221003182147.jp5gn2jpnf4gucdl@pali> Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2022 20:21:47 +0200 From: Pali Rohár <pali@...nel.org> To: Jonathan Derrick <jonathan.derrick@...ux.dev>, Vidya Sagar <vidyas@...dia.com>, Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org> Cc: Lukas Wunner <lukas@...ner.de>, bhelgaas@...gle.com, robh+dt@...nel.org, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, lpieralisi@...nel.org, kw@...ux.com, thierry.reding@...il.com, jonathanh@...dia.com, mani@...nel.org, Sergey.Semin@...kalelectronics.ru, jszhang@...nel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org, kthota@...dia.com, mmaddireddy@...dia.com, sagar.tv@...il.com, Marek Behún <kabel@...nel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH V1 0/4] GPIO based PCIe Hot-Plug support On Monday 03 October 2022 13:09:49 Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Sat, Oct 01, 2022 at 05:50:07PM -0600, Jonathan Derrick wrote: > > On 10/1/2022 10:20 AM, Pali Rohár wrote: > > ... > > > > Would not it better to rather synthesise PCIe Slot Capabilities support > > > in your PCIe Root Port device (e.g. via pci-bridge-emul.c) and then let > > > existing PCI hotplug code to take care for hotplugging? Because it > > > already implements all required stuff for re-scanning, registering and > > > unregistering PCIe devices for Root Ports with Slot Capabilities. And I > > > think that there is no need to have just another (GPIO based) > > > implementation of PCI hotplug. > > > > I did that a few years ago (rejected), but can attest to the robustness of > > the pcie hotplug code on non-hotplug slots. > > https://lwn.net/Articles/811988/ > > I think the thread is here: > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pci/1581120007-5280-1-git-send-email-jonathan.derrick@intel.com/ > and I'm sorry that my response came across as "rejected". I intended > it as "this is good ideas and good work and we should keep going". > > Bjorn Nice! So we have consensus that this is a good idea. Anyway, if you need help with designing something here, please let me know as I have good understanding of all (just two) consumers of pci-bridge-emul.c driver.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists